Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009

[Kingdom of Reitzmag]

I'd like it be on the record that the decision to withdraw the amendment was solely by the members of the Assembly for the European Council and that I had not in any way affected the decision, for my sole purpose in such body is to mediate its proceedings and deliver the decisions to this chamber. However, that aside, I do personally oppose the inclusion of any country actively engaged in a diplomatic conflict to a neutral body. And for this reason, I do not support this amendment especially because the nation being suggested to be seated in the ENAA is a nation in diplomatic conflict against my nation. Despite the claims that the Emperor of Inimicus is not impartial, he is likely to use his position to block our nation from acquiring nuclear weapons if it does decide again to do so.

But then again, I'd like to remind everyone that the decision to support or oppose this act lies on the AEC. Although, it is very likely they will vote against this act.

Dame Yuridiana Yahontov GCC
Councilor, Kingdom of Reitzmag

[Istkalen]

Debate will be extended to 12 April 2022 at 22:00 GMT.

Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen

[BrumBrum]

I would honestly be opposed to anyone in Telum or ECON getting an additional seat or seat on the ENAA. I believe this would threaten the neutrality of the organisation by giving all the power to one alliance by giving them 3 out of 5 seats. I believe it should be a nation like Fremet or some other nation that is neutral yet has experience of nuclear weapons.

James Mizrachi-Roscoe , Councillor for United Duchies

[Duxburian Union]

The seat should not be politicized. To restate a point I raised in an earlier debate, Triumvirate nations held most of the seats for something like 13 years, but not once in all that time did anyone object to that or even express concerns about neutrality. And Triumvirate nations held far more military power than current alliances in the EU. If that arrangement was not concerning, why would a Telum nation be? And why is it being politicized in the first place? Inimicus is clearly senior to Fremet. Taking a junior nuclear power over a senior one needs serious, non-political justifications.

Wesley Greene
Councillor of the Duxburian Union

[Czech Slavia]

There exists no reason to remove Icholasen from the ENAA, although the Democratic Republic of Czech Slavia sees rewording of the act, as proposed by Councillor Tilkanas, as necessary. The Democratic Republic of Czech Slavia is ready to consider expanding the permanent membership status in the ENAA to Inimicus, but only if permanent membership status is not removed from any state. That has been our position previously and it will remain our position.

Václav Kohout
Councillor for Czech Slavia

[Inimicus]

Cllr Mizrachi-Roscoe's statement is a display of his partisanship and narrow-minded politics-based thinking rather than the Inimician government's. He will know, as much as everyone in this Council knows, that the Inimician government is not Reitzmag or the Duchies. The Inimician government and the individuals it has sent to the European stage have a proven track record of fair and decent evaluation of legal and political matters -- simply look at Inimician Chief Justice Benjamin Steyn's term at the head of the ECoJ, or the various important contributions my predecessors and I have made in this Council. I stated it before, and will state it again: Inimicus would not, in any way, selectively block ENAA applications based on alliance structures. Doing such would not only be petty, childish, and stupid, but would also damage the credibility a body like the ENAA needs.

Cllr Kahout raises an interesting point, although I suspect simply adding another nation to the ENAA membership was not the purpose of this Amendment, or indeed the Amendment raised by Cllr Yahontov earlier. Nevertheless, should more Councillors voice support for this strategy, I shall propose an amendment accordingly.

Nicholas Benfield
Deputy Speaker

[Istkalen]

Debate has ended. There is one amendment for vote.

---

AMENDMENT I

SECTION II. THE MAKEUP OF THE ENAA

1. The ENAA shall consist of five members, four of which will be permanent members and one of which will be selected by the European Council every 12 months. This single elected member must be a non-nuclear state and will vacate their seat if they obtain nuclear weapons.

2. The four permanent members of nations with representation on the ENAA are as follows:
   a. The Aelir of the Kendro-Laatzenian Dominions of the Duxburian Union
   b. The Prime Minister of the Apostolic Kingdom of Angleter
   c. The Archbishop of the Most Blessed State of Inquista
   d. The Korojaunu of the United Dominions of Icholasen The Emperor of Inimicus Icholasen

3. The nations that will have representation on the ENAA should assign their most powerful political figure to the role.

4. To ratify a vote within the ENAA, a majority of 51% or greater of the present voting members is required. For there to be a valid vote, a minimum quorum of three members must be obtained.

5. For six months after this clause comes into effect, the representation of Icholasen shall be suspended and replaced, on a temporary basis, by Inimicus. After the end of this six months, the Council will hold a regular vote on whether to further extend this suspension for any period of time.

---

Voting on amendments starts NOW and will continue until 23:59 GMT on 20 April 2022.

Iras Tilkanas
Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen

[Inimicus]

The Empire of Inimicus votes AGAINST the Amendment.

Nicholas Benfield
Deputy Speaker

[Elthize]

The State of Elthize votes AGAINST this amendment.

---

Liam Zachary, Councillor for Elthize

[Spain]

I vote AGAINST this amendment.

Donald Tusk
Councillor for Spain

[Nofoaga]

The Republic of Nofoaga votes AGAINST this amendment.

Mrs. Paul-Gabrielle Muzhare
EU-Councillor for the Republic of Nofoaga

[Inimicus]

Madam Speaker, with your permission, I suggest we move to the next stage of proceedings with this proposal. With four votes AGAINST and no votes FOR, the only amendment has been defeated and the motion is as it stands.

Final voting begins NOW and ends 29th APRIL 2022 AT 14:30 BST.

The Empire of Inimicus votes FOR this Amendment.

Nicholas Benfield
Deputy Speaker

[Spain]

On behalf of the Kingdom of Spain, I vote FOR the Amendment.

Donald Tusk
Councillor for Spain

[Nofoaga]

On behalf of the Republic of Nofoaga, I vote AGAINST this amendment.

Mrs. Paul-Gabrielle Muzhare
EU-Councillor for the Republic of Nofoaga

[Elthize]

The State of Elthize ABSTAINS from voting.

---

Liam Zachary, Councillor for Elthize

[Leagio]

On behalf of the Commonwealth of Leagio, I ABSTAIN in this vote.

Linoel Morel
EU Councilor for Leagio

[BrumBrum]

On behalf of United Duchies I vote AGAINST this ammendment
James Mizrachi Roscoe, Councillor for United Duchies

[Fayrrendel]

On behalf of the Realm of Great Ruthund, I vote AGAINST this amendment.

Tony Odhinazen
EU Councilor for Ruthund

[Kingdom of Reitzmag]

---

The Kingdom of Reitzmag's Assembly for the European Council has decided through a vote with the presence of all members as follows:

Question: Support the 2022 Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act of 2009?

Ayes - 2
Noes - 9
Abtentions - 0

The Noes have it. The Noes have it.

Therefore, the Kingdom of Reitzmag votes AGAINST this amendment.

Dame Yuridiana Yahontov GCC
Councilor, Kingdom of Reitzmag

[Duxburian Union]

On behalf of the Union of Duxburian Dominions, I vote FOR the amendment.

Wesley Greene
Councillor of the Duxburian Union